Beauford Jackson Killed Daughter

Crime - the media loves it, people fear it, and criminals get away with it!
Post Reply
thrice
Posts: 14147
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:28 am

Beauford Jackson Killed Daughter

Post by thrice » Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:35 am

http://www.startribune.com/467/story/999512.html

The 18 year old father of 15 month old baby Destiny Jackson was arrested in her murder, two weeks after the child was returned from foster care. The infant had been taken from Jackson and her mother, 18 year old Maeve Clifford, after she had suffered a suspicious skull fracture in November. Jackson claimed to have accidentally dropped the baby at that time, but failed a polygraph exam when questioned. The suspect's mother denies his responsibility for either injury. The baby's maternal grandmother, a registered nurse, expresses surprise that the child was returned to the parents, but blames overloaded social workers. The child died of blunt force trauma injuries consistent with a beating to the torso.

Once again, as in a recent Maplewood case of a suspect killing his unborn second child, we see a train wreck of a relationship resulting in death
http://www.startribune.com/467/story/969821.html

The child's mother, daughter of a middle class registered nurse, met the suspect at an alternative high school and was pregnant by 16. The 18 year old father, who has other children according to the St. Paul Pio-Press story, was a convicted burglar and auto thief. The child had been untreated for 2 days after its skull fracture before the mother took it to hospital due to a malformed skull, and she supported her boyfriend's story in order to regain custody. Relatives said the child was often left in the care of others, including a 13 year old cousin.

Sadly enough, we see yet another child of the middle class become a welfare mother due to an ill considered relationship with a low life ex con, and tragedy is the result. Unsuprisingly, we hear nothing about the fathers of the suspect or the child's mother in either account. Seeing a pattern emerging?

probe
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:04 pm

Beauford Jackson

Post by probe » Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:16 pm

Yes it is a disturbing trend. I have seen in in my own family. My niece whose parents are solidly middle class, had a baby at 17 with a 16 year old is now living on the generosity of the state. My parents, children of the 50's schooled us to do whatever we had to keep the state out of our affairs. Some where along the way, my niece didnt get that message. She is a smart young woman but got caught up in something. Trying to keep a boy? I dont know, but it is an increasingly common trend. Then again, her mother and father waited 16 years to get married. Perhaps, she didnt see the value of a committed relationship living with 2 people that did not get married for most of her life. Perhaps that is the unfortunate result of so much cohabitation in our culture. I do not know. Its a sad trend.

LadyM
Posts: 909
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:59 am

Handicapping our children

Post by LadyM » Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:42 am

I wonder if much of the trend we're seeing doesn't stem so much from having so much cohabitation in our society but rather from a lack of stress on personal accountability. A favorite author of mine once said not to handicap your children by making their lives too easy.

Most parents want to shield their children from hardship, from the evil elements of our world, and from having to suffer, but in doing so, they may be condemning their children to learn "the hard way". The world will not coddle young adults like their parents do. Yes, we have safety nets like welfare and other social programs out to help people in desperate situations, but many of the lessons about having to rely on yourself and your wits to solve problems are never learned because a child's every wish (within reason) is granted by their parents.

The reasons for this are as many as there are children and parents. The result is still the same. Many young people assume they will succeed because they've been told they're the brightest, best, most wonderful folks on the planet. To their parents, they are just that. To society at large they are just another person in th mix, no better, no worse.

thrice
Posts: 14147
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:28 am

Post by thrice » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:20 am

As a parent, and as a former teenager (!) I realize that parents can't have 24/7 control and awareness of what their kids do. Teens do raise their share of hell, and are very creative in doing so in ways that parents aren't aware of. Like I told my kids- "don't try to pull any stunts on me, because I know every trick in the book, and wrote a few of them myself".

What concerns me when I read the Maplewood and St. Paul stories is this. Both young women came from middle class backgrounds with an attorney and a registered nurse as parents. They can't claim the usual excuses of poverty, ignorance, or a desperate situation to excuse crazy self destructive behavior.

As I said, I know kids sneak around, and bad things happen. But from the many situations I've seen and heard about, a lot of these kids are not sneaking around. They are doing their stupid stuff right in front of the parents, who tolerate it and say nothing. When girls are getting pregnant at 15-16 years old, they are often sleeping with their boyfriends on a regular basis, often right in their own home with the knowledge and consent of their parents. What kind of parent with an education and a profession allows their child to have unprotected sex with no apparent birth control at age 15, knowing that they have no means of support?

I hate to throw blame on an already bad situation, but the fact is that most of these kids could not live these self-destructive lifestyles without their parent's passive consent and support. When you hear the St. Paul girl's mother making comments like "oh well, I don't understand why she stayed with him. I tried to tell her..." it sounds like they are very passive and unassertive parents. Or maybe, if the news story is correct, a 64 year old parent may lack the energy to chase around her 16 year old daughter, which is probably an interesting story unto itself...

LadyM
Posts: 909
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:59 am

Post by LadyM » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:31 am

and the true victim is that child, not even a year old yet, who was killed by her own father.

I know Child Protection Services are understaffed and overworked, but if you have a baby with suspicious enough injuries that she was taken from her parents once, why would you return her? Especially when said parents are only children themselves?

thrice
Posts: 14147
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:28 am

Post by thrice » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:33 am

It would also be fascinating to hear more about the other children fathered by this 18 year old which were briefly mentioned in the Pio-Press article. Wonder how they're doing, and how responsible he has been in regards to supporting and raising them.

probe
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:04 pm

Many things contribute to this phonemenom

Post by probe » Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:38 pm

I think that many things contribute to this disturbing trend but I think we need to look at why we assume a middle class home makes a better home? According to today's standards, my parents circumstances would mean only bad things. My fathers mother had him at 16 in the Jim Crow South. My moms parents died when she was 2. Her mother, sick with TB went around finding homes for all 7 of her kids before she died. The people that raised her were older and poor and ill throughout her teen years. My parents would be doomed according to how most people think today. This idea that poverty the bank account = poverty of spirit is wrong in my opinoin. (not exactly on subject but an observation I would like to make.) Money does not make a family, the people do. Money makes it easier...sometimes. We know f'd up poor, middle class and rich people.

In my nieces case I do wonder how much the fact that he parents didnt marry has impacted her decisions but that is not all to be honest. She was never required to do much of anything. She started an activity and she was allowed to quite when she got bored. She was ridiculously spoiled. Another trend I have noticed is that there is so little separation between parents and kids today. When I was a kid (long long ago) we had a kid world and an adult world. Unless things got out of hand, parents stayed out of the kid world and let us navigate it. Thats how we learn. My nieces parents were so mixed up in her business and life it was amazing. She never had a fight with a friend or a boyfriend that her parents were not involved in. I also agree that this obsession with a kids self esteem has gone way overboard.

I guess I dont think that there is one answer. Thats all

thrice
Posts: 14147
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:28 am

Post by thrice » Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:30 pm

Probe-
I mention middle class because a lot of people use the excuse of poverty. They say a poor kid is hopeless, and sees no better future, so they don't care how they act because it won't matter. Some say poor parents are so busy working to provide that they don't have time to watch their kids. Some say poor kids are ignorant, and don't know where babies come from. Some of these things are true at times, but not all, and not always. My position is that kids from a financially secure family do have access to education all the way through college. They aren't starving, nor do their parents have to ignore them to put food on the table. They have futures as bright as they want them to be, and have plenty of sexual education so they do know how to get birth control and do know where babies come from. In most cases, I would just say that middle class and upper class kids get in trouble because their parents don't know or care who they're with and what they're doing, or lack the backbone to stop them when they are doing wrong or hanging out with troublemakers.

probe
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:04 pm

Thrice

Post by probe » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:03 pm

I think we are in agreement basically, just say it differently. What do u think of the following?

Some people use poverty as an excuse for making bad choices all of thier life. Likewise because our society (society not you in particular, i want to be very clear about that) so often equates poverty with low morals, there are some who use poverty as justification for writing poor kids off. Likewise, middle class and upper class parents too often think that buying thier kids stuff is thier primary job and cant or are unwilling to do the real heavy lifting of parenting.


I dont have kids and Im not around them too often so I can only go on what I have seen from friends and family. In my families case, my nieces parents (too much in my opinion) were very involved. Not only that she had lots of support from her extended family. She would have like 7 people come to her school Open Houses, the teachers would be amazed. I will tell you that I was surprised at how little sex education she received in school. It was less than I got back in the 80's. (Perhaps other parents can tell me if her experience is unusual.) But that hardly matters. She certainly got sex education at home.

Despite all this she still made bad decisions. Had a baby at 17 and just to put the cherry on all of it she dropped out of school. Its just downright mystifying to me! After generations of moving forward, she is going backwards and becoming a stereotype. Its all very sad. But you know what, the book has not closed on her life yet. Perhaps her child will help her develop the backbone she hasnt shown thus far.

thrice
Posts: 14147
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:28 am

Jackson, Clifford Lied, Reports Say

Post by thrice » Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:17 am

http://www.startribune.com/467/story/1008313.html

Investigation reveals that the parents of murdered toddler Destiny Jackson lied about previous injuries to the child, and that the injuries that killed her could not have occurred from a fall, as her father Beauford Jackson claims.

LadyM
Posts: 909
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:59 am

Beauford Jackson

Post by LadyM » Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:23 pm

LIED? NO! You're kidding right?

I"m sorry for the dripping sarcasm. The truly horrifying part is that this child was given back to the parents.

Post Reply